Massive Assault Part 2

[Greybeard]

Hello Fellow SP gamers,

Wigam tells me that the 'Massive Assault' team game thread is pulling some decent interest in our community. Will be fun to read when the game is over. All the team players are blocked out at the moment.

With that said, I am considering a 2nd massive 'assault' game to play as a team..

This one will still involve a river crossing, but on a slightly different flavor and a very different map (attached)..

This can be used for any time/location.. but the intent here is to add a flavor to the Command/Conquer Tourney - Korea 1952..

It's summer 1952, and the Allied armies led by the USMC are going to attempt to cross the Yalu River..

as you look at the map, there is one stone bridge, one shallow water crossing, and several wooden bridges..

the point of the game is for the Chinese/PRK to hold back the Allies, yet also NOT blow up the bridges unless there is little choice.. why not blow the bridges?

The Chinese/PRK intend to push the allies off the Korean Penensula and NEED the bridges intact for supplying their troops later on.. to loose the bridges would be a major setback..

so here's the idea.. this game will be set as a 'assault' game but both sides have equal points.. resulting in many of the bridges (north end of map within hex collumn 80) under Chinese control at the begining.

here's the twist.. the bridges outside Chi-com control can be blown at any time - no penalty (see below).. just remember that to knock down a wood bridge, you need a 150mm or larger gun to do it with.. if the Chi-Com's don't have any.. you can 'borrow' one off-map 152mm battery from your Russian 'Advisors' to hit the brigdes outside your start area.

otherwise you'll need something with a demo charge in the area to move to the bridge and blow it up..

the rest of the bridges within the Chi-Com zone of control are different.. these are the ones' that must not be destroyed.. ..ok - there is an option to do so.. but a stiff penalty prevails.. see below for bridge control conditions

The ALLIES need the bridges under communist control.. but not as bad because the allied engineers can quickly erect pontoon bridges after the battle that will get the job done..

As allies player - you really don't want the Chinese to control a bridge at the end of the game.

game is big.. 40K for each player.. yes the intent is to max out the unit counts.. again..a choice is needed for the Allies.. there are barge carriers in the game.. but remember that if you don't leave a unit slot open for the barge that drops.. then you'll have no barges.. just a big fat soft target (the barge truck)

this is intended as a TEAM play game.. WinMBT.. august 1952

any takers?

Greybeard

---

oops one more thing.. bridge control condtions at end of game

1: Allies control bridge flags, bridge intact: allies +500;
2: Chinese destroy Bridge: Chinese -1500, allies -500
3: Chinese control Bridge, bridge intact: chinese +1500; allies -1000
4: Chinese control Bridge flags, Allies destroy bridge = Chinese +500
5: Allies destroy bridge with artillery/air strike: -1000 for allies

to determine who controls the bridges.. there will be a flag set at each end of each bridge.. to control the bridge a player must own both flags at end of game.

Allies will be 'player 1'

I'm on the allies team :)

Cheers!
Greybeard

[jadpanther]

LoL.......again it sounds like another interesting battle.........call me if you get no takers........

But I think others deserve a chance to feel the wrath of your hordes of infantry and tanks overrunning them as well........lol.

Jadpanther

[Greybeard]

LoL.......again it sounds like another interesting battle.........call me if you get no takers........

But I think others deserve a chance to feel the wrath of your hordes of infantry and tanks overrunning them as well........lol.

Jadpanther

:dunno:

what hordes??

anyway.. people are looking, just no bites yet.. thanks for the offer.. again this is intended for a Korea era battle, but it doesn't have to be.. and looking at the map again.. it's possible for the attacker to deploy across the river way down south.. this was not intended.. so any games that might be undertaken.. attacker should not deploy any closer than 20 hexes EAST of the river.. gotta give the defender an opportunity to blow the south bridges 1st...

greybeard

[Gila]

I'd be interested, playing either side,but is the CD needed to participate?
Then i'd have to be out.

Would be great to have team play battle for WW2 also, i do have that CD.

[Greybeard]

I'd be interested, playing either side,but is the CD needed to participate?
Then i'd have to be out.

Would be great to have team play battle for WW2 also, i do have that CD.

Hello Gila,

no - doesn't need the CD.. and yes map can be used for ww2 play.. might make a fun 'rhine River Crossing' or similar type of game..

Cheers!
Greybeard

PS.. I'm up for a team ww2 game if people desire..

[Gila]

WW2 would be better IMO.
Of course, buy points would have to be reduced, accordinly to the skill and amount of players for each side, for example. would a newbie want or should, control a possible 3 BN's?
I guess last years ladder statistics should be considered on who gets what based on thier abilites thus far.
Newbies should be welcolme to play, however, that's what makes it realistic, some veterens mixed with greener players with a Overall Commander with the best statistics or whoever is voted in or takes that position willing and everyone agrees.
This could take some time, a very long time to play out, so with dedication and with a rule if someone fades or can't play his force in the allowed time, then the Commander either takes over or delgates to one of his sub's untill that player can resume command of his force's again.
I could see a Rhine crossing on the map you have being a very definate possiblity.
I'm rambling some now, hope you get more interest;)

[Greybeard]

WW2 would be better IMO.
Of course, buy points would have to be reduced, accordinly to the skill and amount of players for each side, for example. would a newbie want or should, control a possible 3 BN's?
I guess last years ladder statistics should be considered on who gets what based on thier abilites thus far.
Newbies should be welcolme to play, however, that's what makes it realistic, some veterens mixed with greener players with a Overall Commander with the best statistics or whoever is voted in or takes that position willing and everyone agrees.
This could take some time, a very long time to play out, so with dedication and with a rule if someone fades or can't play his force in the allowed time, then the Commander either takes over or delgates to one of his sub's untill that player can resume command of his force's again.
I could see a Rhine crossing on the map you have being a very definate possiblity.
I'm rambling some now, hope you get more interest;)

Hello Gila,

well, I think one of the sticking points for most players here, is the even number of points thing.. for some odd reason, the general feeling seems to be that an assault/defend game should be point favored to the attacker.. otherwise the defense has a push-over win on their hands.. not to beat my own drum, but I've played several even-point assault games and have not yet been defeated, but neither have I always won... meaning I've at least pulled a draw.. in individual combat..

oh, yeah, it's a hell of a challenge for the attacker.. but if done right, not impossible.. :) and my opponents have ended up scrambling to keep things contained..

I like a challenge..

but the map can be used for any type of battle.. even a meeting engagment which turns into a battle for the bridges would be losts of fun..

as for a ww2 game.. yes the points would need to be turned down a little, or alot.. players choice..

I also like your idea for the team game thing.. yes it does take a large commitment, as for 2 players per side it works out to about 3 turns completed every 2 weeks.. so you can see how long winded a 60 turn assault game will take.. a long, long time.. about 6 months..

cheers!
Greybeard

[Gila]

WW2 would be better IMO.
Of course, buy points would have to be reduced, accordinly to the skill and amount of players for each side, for example. would a newbie want or should, control a possible 3 BN's?
I guess last years ladder statistics should be considered on who gets what based on thier abilites thus far.
Newbies should be welcolme to play, however, that's what makes it realistic, some veterens mixed with greener players with a Overall Commander with the best statistics or whoever is voted in or takes that position willing and everyone agrees.
This could take some time, a very long time to play out, so with dedication and with a rule if someone fades or can't play his force in the allowed time, then the Commander either takes over or delgates to one of his sub's untill that player can resume command of his force's again.
I could see a Rhine crossing on the map you have being a very definate possiblity.
I'm rambling some now, hope you get more interest;)

I also like your idea for the team game thing.. yes it does take a large commitment, as for 2 players per side it works out to about 3 turns completed every 2 weeks.. so you can see how long winded a 60 turn assault game will take.. a long, long time.. about 6 months..

My idea?
Actually, it was yours i was just expanding on it a bit (-:

Something else just crossed my foggy brain ,depending on how many players per side, can not some chose to be an Arty Commander or Air Commander, with free licence to use their command in the the way they see best,within the outlines of the main battle plan of the Overall Commander "OC"?
There would calls for an airstrike or arty barrage on points from those in the front who need it.
There could be also be one or 2 the better players to be as assault sub-commander as the on point force, and maybe one in reserve,(always good to have a reserve) depending of course how many on each team.
The OC's job would be the very most important one, to keep everything coordinated,give advice or overrule some bad actions, and have to pick up slack when someone is unable to play,but if all goes well with the subs his job goes a whole alot easier,,,,yeah right we all know that never happens in battle! lol
Also with the likely length of this, if someone can't continue, delegate those forces to one who can, or recruit a new player, but have no penalties against the one who had go on leave(has benefits as actually played all way through)
Might have to have only CD users on the frontline, as formations might get mingled,free ver. users don't have the "5 key" function, formation cohesion would be critical for front line forces, not so Atry and Air commanders however(-;

Maybe i'm just a dreamer,as difficult as this may seem,i really like to see it happen

[Greybeard]

WW2 would be better IMO.
Of course, buy points would have to be reduced, accordinly to the skill and amount of players for each side, for example. would a newbie want or should, control a possible 3 BN's?
I guess last years ladder statistics should be considered on who gets what based on thier abilites thus far.
Newbies should be welcolme to play, however, that's what makes it realistic, some veterens mixed with greener players with a Overall Commander with the best statistics or whoever is voted in or takes that position willing and everyone agrees.
This could take some time, a very long time to play out, so with dedication and with a rule if someone fades or can't play his force in the allowed time, then the Commander either takes over or delgates to one of his sub's untill that player can resume command of his force's again.
I could see a Rhine crossing on the map you have being a very definate possiblity.
I'm rambling some now, hope you get more interest;)

I also like your idea for the team game thing.. yes it does take a large commitment, as for 2 players per side it works out to about 3 turns completed every 2 weeks.. so you can see how long winded a 60 turn assault game will take.. a long, long time.. about 6 months..

My idea?
Actually, it was yours i was just expanding on it a bit (-:

Something else just crossed my foggy brain ,depending on how many players per side, can not some chose to be an Arty Commander or Air Commander, with free licence to use their command in the the way they see best,within the outlines of the main battle plan of the Overall Commander "OC"?
There would calls for an airstrike or arty barrage on points from those in the front who need it.
There could be also be one or 2 the better players to be as assault sub-commander as the on point force, and maybe one in reserve,(always good to have a reserve) depending of course how many on each team.
The OC's job would be the very most important one, to keep everything coordinated,give advice or overrule some bad actions, and have to pick up slack when someone is unable to play,but if all goes well with the subs his job goes a whole alot easier,,,,yeah right we all know that never happens in battle! lol
Also with the likely length of this, if someone can't continue, delegate those forces to one who can, or recruit a new player, but have no penalties against the one who had go on leave(has benefits as actually played all way through)
Might have to have only CD users on the frontline, as formations might get mingled,free ver. users don't have the "5 key" function, formation cohesion would be critical for front line forces, not so Atry and Air commanders however(-;

Maybe i'm just a dreamer,as difficult as this may seem,i really like to see it happen

Hello Gila,

One thing to remeber is that the more players you have, the longer this sort of thing takes. In my opinion based on experience, 6 players for a game would be about max that I would recommend.

as for keeping units identifiable for each player.. simple expediant is to re-name the units.. this is what Gunslinger and I chose to do in the team game we are involoved with right now.. my units are renamed to stuff like: GB Mortar, GB Infantry, GB M-18.. GB being short for 'Greybeard'.. Gunslingers are similar: 'Gun Infantry', etc

easy to find your units even when all mixed in all over

GReybeard

[Vesku]

I've played a multi player battle some time ago involving 6 or 7 players per side, each commanded a company of tanks/mech inf/assault guns, force commander had a battery of mortars and nothing else. Force commander issued orders to subs and they tried to fulfill them to the best of their ability. We managed to play a turn a week mostly, it was force commander's responsibility to make sure the pace was kept up. Interesting battle but I have to say that it was a handful to keep running smoothly even with such a small force. It was a nice simulation from commander's point of view, to have a group of subs with very different skills, you had to estimate what they would be able to do and who might work well together.